You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to notifications@skywalking.apache.org by GitBox <gi...@apache.org> on 2020/04/07 03:15:38 UTC
[GitHub] [skywalking] dmsolr opened a new issue #4612: Stricter PluginTests
expected data verifier
dmsolr opened a new issue #4612: Stricter PluginTests expected data verifier
URL: https://github.com/apache/skywalking/issues/4612
We found the below fields of reference in `expectedData.yaml` that are not strict enough. When we work at #4599 .
1. parentTraceSegmentId
2. parentService
3. serviceName
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
With regards,
Apache Git Services
[GitHub] [skywalking] wu-sheng commented on issue #4612: More strict
PluginTests expected data verifier
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
wu-sheng commented on issue #4612: More strict PluginTests expected data verifier
URL: https://github.com/apache/skywalking/issues/4612#issuecomment-611968609
The strict means, we are only using `not null` in the reference validation, but actually, in current protocol we can and should do that.
> P.S. I may need this in my company work so I didn't make it part of the SkyWalking project :)
This is totally understandable, you could choose in/out of ASF for your own. But I need to say, if this tool is a person tool, it is suitable for a TLP to use it directly, because of orphan risk. This principle is not for your project, this is generalized level meaning.
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
With regards,
Apache Git Services
[GitHub] [skywalking] dmsolr commented on issue #4612: More strict
PluginTests expected data verifier
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
dmsolr commented on issue #4612: More strict PluginTests expected data verifier
URL: https://github.com/apache/skywalking/issues/4612#issuecomment-611983248
Hi, @kezhenxu94
This issue means what the rules of `expectedData.yml` are not strict enough. For instance, `serviceName` should be the exact name, not `not null`.
PS, the project is very awesome. I think we could bring it to the agent-test tools instead of `validator tools`.
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
With regards,
Apache Git Services
[GitHub] [skywalking] wu-sheng commented on issue #4612: Stricter
PluginTests expected data verifier
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
wu-sheng commented on issue #4612: Stricter PluginTests expected data verifier
URL: https://github.com/apache/skywalking/issues/4612#issuecomment-610150108
> 1.parentTraceSegmentId
Segment id should be fine. Let's keep it not null.
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
With regards,
Apache Git Services
[GitHub] [skywalking] dmsolr edited a comment on issue #4612: More strict
PluginTests expected data verifier
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
dmsolr edited a comment on issue #4612: More strict PluginTests expected data verifier
URL: https://github.com/apache/skywalking/issues/4612#issuecomment-611983248
Hi, @kezhenxu94
This issue means what the rules of `expectedData.yml` are not strict enough. For instance, `serviceName` should be the exact name, not `not null`.
PS, it is very awesome. I think we could bring it to the agent-test tools and instead of `validator tools`.
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
With regards,
Apache Git Services
[GitHub] [skywalking] wu-sheng edited a comment on issue #4612: More strict
PluginTests expected data verifier
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
wu-sheng edited a comment on issue #4612: More strict PluginTests expected data verifier
URL: https://github.com/apache/skywalking/issues/4612#issuecomment-611968609
The strict means, we are only using `not null` in the reference validation, but actually, in current protocol we can and should do that.
> P.S. I may need this in my company work so I didn't make it part of the SkyWalking project :)
This is totally understandable, you could choose in/out of ASF for your own. But I need to say, if this tool is a personal tool, it is not suitable for a TLP to use it directly, because of orphan risk. This principle is not for your project, this is generalized level meaning.
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
With regards,
Apache Git Services
[GitHub] [skywalking] kezhenxu94 commented on issue #4612: More strict
PluginTests expected data verifier
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
kezhenxu94 commented on issue #4612: More strict PluginTests expected data verifier
URL: https://github.com/apache/skywalking/issues/4612#issuecomment-611967235
@dmsolr what do you mean by saying "not strict enough"? Any further detail? I have been also planing to verify the E2E expected data more strictly so long, and recently I've got a chance to set up a framework ([yaml-validator](http://github.com/kezhenxu94/yaml-validator)) to do this, and I've been adjusting the E2E tests now, it works well somehow, so please take a look at it to see whether it fits your scenario :)
P.S. I may need this in my company work so I didn't make it part of the SkyWalking project :)
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
With regards,
Apache Git Services